Help Me Out Here - Mrs. Clinton's Most Courageous Stands?

[MannyGoldstein]

The only political risk that I can ever remember Mrs. Clinton taking is her health care program - and even then, the risk was mitigated by the plan ensuring that most of those getting fat off of private medicine would continue to get fat.

Other than that, what are some stands that Mrs. Clinton took that were contrary to public opinion polls at the time?

Can anyone name even one or two? I'm not a Clinton fan, but there's gotta be a few that I'm missing.

Specifics please.

[Little Wing]

1. Using that basis Bush would be King Valiant

Ya know, against public opinion and all

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Ever Heard of the Golden Mean?

Being at either end of the spectrum here is bad. On one end, you're a human windsock. On the other end, you're psychopath.

[Little Wing]

16. I don't think you have a full understanding of "The Golden Mean"

but yes, I've heard of it :crazy:

[Pharaoh]

2. not a clue here

Took a stand against Bill getting blow jobs from interns I think, but I'm not sure if that counts? :spank:

[MannyGoldstein]

4. I LOVE YOUR TAG LINE n/t

[Pharaoh]

5. true though isn't it

if your severely depressed you are probably just more conscious of whats really going on :beer:

[karynnj]

39. I'm glad you pointed that tag line out - it' s great.

[blm]

6. Didn't she call Bush out on Tora Bora? Supported Kerry's call for Rumsfeld's firing in 2003-4?

Led the call for investigation into Downing Street Memos? Led Alito filibuster? Co-sponsored Iraq withdrawal plan with Kerryand Feingold?


Didn't she?

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. These positions were "contrary to public opinion polls?" n/t

[blm]

11. heh...they were contrary to SENATE Dems' opinion polls.

Unfortunately, for this country.

[sandnsea]

71. lol

You had me there for a minute. hehe.

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

7. Refusing to stay home and bake CooKies!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html
excerpt~HILLARY CLINTON: I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.

eom from this housewife.

[Lord Byron]

51. Yeah that remark was really insulting

eom from someone who was raised by a housewife.

[ieoeja]

53. Why was that insulting?

Let's pretend your mom was a successful lawyer until her husband was elected governor. So she decided to step down from her job and be a full time housewife instead. Later, when your dad is running for president, instead of being asked, "do you feel that your lawyering represented a conflict of interest with your husband being a governor," I suppose she'd have been asked something like, "why did you quit your successful career after your husband was elected."

"I suppose I could have stayed in law, conducting deals and using my husband's name to further my career."

Would that have been insulting to all female lawyers? If not, then why do you find such insult in Hillary's response?

Or had you never heard this comment in context ... and never wasted five minutes of your time wondering in what context the statement was made?

[SaveElmer]

9. Why is that a criteria?

When did Lincoln announce his opposition to slavery ? When it became politically possible that's when.

Clinton is not a back bench bomb thrower that gets nothing done...like Dennis Kucinich. In fact she is more interested in getting actual things accomplished. Ask New Yorkers how she performed after 9/11....

She has done an excellent job, in only 6 years, almost all in the minority at forging the relationships needed to get what needed to be done for her constituents. It is that kind of skill that will be needed as President...as the prime example of the opposite mentality in the White House is so ably demonstrating!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

12. No No No

When did Lincoln announce his opposition to slavery ? When it became politically possible that's when.

Lincoln was virulently anti-slavery for many years before he was president. He helped to found the Republican party - an anti-slavery party.

[SaveElmer]

14. That is simply wrong...

Lincoln was certainly uncomfortable with slavery, but never "virulently ant-slavery." He didn't campaign on it, and did everything he could to keepo slavery from becoming an issue before and during the civil war. In fact, had he campaigned on an anti-slavery platform he would have been soundly defeated!

He didn't issue the emancipation proclamation until it was politically feasible after Antietam, and then only as a war measure. Up until blacks began fighting he viewed tham as inherently inferior, and explored various ways of colonizing them back to Africa...it wasn't until shortly before his assasination that his views began to noticeable change, advocating limited suffrage for blacks soldiers after the war...

Lincoln's genius was 1. his ability to grow and change his position when he was proven wrong, and 2. to know the exact moment when a controversial move was politically feasible.

The Republican party was not based on anti-slavery...it certainly attracted anti-slavery whigs like Seward and Chase, but it also attracted those not in favor of banning slavery such as Edward Bates...

[Critters2]

26. You're mistaken

I live across the street from the site of the first Lincoln-Douglas debate. Living here aroused my curiousity, so in my first few months here I researched that debate in some depth. In it, Lincoln argued against slavery quite firmly on moral/ethical grounds, while Douglas argued states' rights. This was well before he was president. Slavery was a major issue in the debates, and Lincoln was clear in his opposition.

From that debate:

"I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects-certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. " Abraham Lincoln, 1858

[SaveElmer]

27. Except when he was debating in Southern Illinois...

Where he took a less charitable position...the consummate politician!

"No Garrisonian abolitionist, Lincoln shared some of the Southern attitudes toward the Negro. Though he denounced the Dred Scott decision for its doctrine that a Negro could not be a citizen, he said very frankly: ". . . I am not in favor of negro citizenship." Similarly, he emphatically disclaimed the doctrine of social equality for the races; declined to advocate the repeal of the fugitive slave law; took no stand against the admission of further slave states; and qualified his "house divided" declaration by explaining that it contained no threat of radical violence or sectional strife."

Again, he was uncomfortable with slavery, had been since a trip south as a young man...but slavery was not what he ran on in 1860, he would have lost had he done so. He fought the war on the basis of Union, forced Genral Butler to return slaves he had confiscated in Maryland, explored various colonization schemes, and eventually freed them on military grounds...

He did not begin to shed his racism until near the end of the war...which is to his credit...I am a huge Lincoln admirerer...but the fact is, slavery was not what he ran on, and not the basis on which he was attempting to save the union...

[MannyGoldstein]

32. If You're A Huge Lincoln Admirer, I Have A Happy Surprise For You

Read some more about him* - he was even better than you're giving him credit for. Most of the misconceptions about the men cam from the interplay of the following three facts:

1. He was virulently anti-slavery
2. He was even more virulently pro-union, and pro-Constitution.
3. He did not take shortcuts - everything had to be done by the letter and spirit of the law.

*I recommend: Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words That Remade America, and Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution - fantastic books.

[SaveElmer]

33. In fact I have read those books and more...

I have an MA in History actually, and Civil War history was one area of concentration...

To describe Lincoln as "virulently" anti-slavery is not correct. William Lloyd Garrison was "virulently" anti-slavery. It could be argued that William Seward was "virulently" anti slavery (though he tempered that when it looked like he might get the Republican nomination.

Lincoln was uncomfortable with it, he viewed it as an evil in the abstract, but it was not his priority when he entered politics, nor wehen he entered the white house...

And as to your third contention...you may get arguments on this based on his suspension of habeus corpus...

[MannyGoldstein]

35. He Suspended Habeas Corpus - But Immediately Asked Congress To OK It

He recognized that the President's "war powers" were an expedient - not an override.

[SaveElmer]

37. How about his jailing...

Of opposition journalists...

[MannyGoldstein]

38. I Didn't Know That He Did That

Was it only in border states? - I'm guessing that it was only in areas that were "hot", not in, say, Massachusetts.

[SaveElmer]

40. Well it was in DC...

Look I am just playing devils advocate here...Lincoln was the greatest this country ever produced...if he took some liberties with Habeus Corpus etc, there certainly was no situation like it before to guide him...

He was devoted to the Declaration of Independence and the COnstitution...he was the savior of the Union...

Whatever faults he had in comparison were minor in my book!!!

[karynnj]

41. self delete

[Smarmie Doofus]

28. Not exactly :"Monstrous injustice of slavery itself".

From wikipedia: >>>> was a speech against the act, on October 16, 1854, in Peoria, that caused Lincoln to stand out among the other free soil orators of the day. In the speech, Lincoln commented upon the Kansas-Nebraska Act:
“ declared indifference, but as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself.>>>>>>


>>>Lincoln was certainly uncomfortable with slavery, but never "virulently ant-slavery.">>>>

"Monstrous injustice" = "virulently anti-slavery", seems to me.

[SaveElmer]

29. During the Lincoln Douglas Debates

No Garrisonian abolitionist, Lincoln shared some of the Southern attitudes toward the Negro. Though he denounced the Dred Scott decision for its doctrine that a Negro could not be a citizen, he said very frankly: ". . . I am not in favor of negro citizenship." Similarly, he emphatically disclaimed the doctrine of social equality for the races; declined to advocate the repeal of the fugitive slave law; took no stand against the admission of further slave states; and qualified his "house divided" declaration by explaining that it contained no threat of radical violence or sectional strife.

Lincoln was a politician, no different than today, though far more skilled. He tailored his position based on his audience...

[ieoeja]

57. I believe "citzenship" and "slavery" are two entirely different topics.

Noone said he believed in full equality. They said he was opposed to slavery. You appear to be mixing up these two topics.

Of course, there is then the subjective definition of "virulent". He certainly did not run on a platform of ending slavery. And had the South not rebelled, I am 100% certain he would have done nothing to end slavery in the South. What he would have probably done is work on restoring the Free Soil rights in the North.

[Smarmie Doofus]

58. Indeed. Nicely explicated. n/t

>>I believe "citzenship" and "slavery" are two entirely different topics.


No one said he believed in full equality. They said he was opposed to slavery. You appear to be mixing up these two topics.>>>>

[SaveElmer]

60. Lets get back to my original statement...

"When did Lincoln announce his opposition to slavery ? When it became politically possible that's when."

The key there is announce...when did he announce his opposition to slavery...

I had not intended on getting in a discussion on Lincoln, was making a point about different types of politicians...so was perhaps too glib...

Of course what I meant was when did he announce his measures against slavery...specifically the emancipation proclamation. He did so when it was politically feasible...knowing full well to announce it earlier would have caused a revolt in the army, among many of its commanders, and possibly would have driven Kentucky, Missouri, and possibly Maryland into the confederate camp...

He didn't campaign on an anti-slavery platform, in fact he took pains to do just the opposite...assuring the south that ending slavery was not his objective, only that he opposed its spread west...so again I say he was not virulently anti-slavery.

I was comparing a man like Kucinich, who up to now has largely been a bomb thrower IMO, making proposals that have no chance of passage...with others who prefer to work within the system, to make what progress they could, with whoever they needed to work with, and thus not taking absolutist positions on every issue that would alienate those they are working with....

[ieoeja]

65. Oh, sure, let's bring facts into this.

Your original premise is, of course, accurate. Lincoln could never have ended Slavery through non-violent means, and would never have done so through violent means had the pro-Slavery side not initiated violence first.

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

13. Alright

I'm with you in a lot of this thought process, but it doesn't have to apply simply to people based on ideology. Bernie Sanders is universally respected simply for the fact that he can transcend his own personal views and build coalitions to pass bills.

Being a moderate Democrat running as an effective legislator isn't a bad thing, but it doesn't pop. If the slightly hawkish policy choices she made prior to the last month were really the way she felt about the world, than fine. But it does lead many to believe that she's now finding some anti-war religion in an extremely calculating way. In fairness, same goes to Edwards, for me at least.

[SaveElmer]

18. Well I have to disagree with you on her war stance...

As mediamatters points out she has been holding Bush's feet to the fire for some time...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200701200001

Debunks that she has made a recent conversion. Also, the fact that she has not apologized for her IWR vote (which she should not IMO), would dipute this notion as well. SHe has said she would not vote for it had the true facts been known in October 2002, which in truth the damning evidence on intelligence lies came out in early 2003....

Not sure I really said anything about idealogy per se...perhaps my use of Kucinich gave that impression. Plenty of progressives more interested in getting things done than bomb throwing...Bernie Sanders is certainly one, and Paul Wellstone was another...

So on that I certainly agree with you...

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

21. Respect

I think it would blow minds here to find out that Paul Wellstone, who's been weirdly turned into this weird Che-eqsue "never collaborate with the enemy!" figure, did some of his most important work in the senate alongside Sam Brownback. Its all about compromise, yo.

[SaveElmer]

22. Yep...

I am a Minnesota native, though moved away before Wellstone came in...but I was always a huge fan of his, even if I didn't agree with him all the time...you always knew he was trying to accomplish something worthwhile...and he could really blow away folks with the logic of his arguments...

And he is a person who really grew into the job as he went along. The fact that so many Republican members were so broken up over his death...I remember hearing Domenici breaking down in tears talking about him...attests to that!!!

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

25. Not to make this thread go on forever, but....

Jesus, I remember that interview with Domenici on CNN the morning the plane went down. I was 21 and probably still a big enough neophyte to believe that the Republicans would be dancing on Wellstones grave. It completely shattered me to find that these Republicans who'd I'd turned into towering evil incarnate in my mind were real people with real emotional relationships with their colleagues.

[Smarmie Doofus]

23. So, by implication, what are you ( and she) saying....

>>>SHe has said she would not vote for it had the true facts been known in October 2002, which in truth the damning evidence on intelligence lies came out in early 2003.....>>>>

about the 22 senate DEMS and the majority of the DEM house caucus that voted *against* IWR?

Were they irresponsible?

Were they clairvoyant ?

Either she erred or they did. Which is it?

[SaveElmer]

24. Not at all...

ANd if you review my posts you will see that I have never once criticized those voting against the IWR...they turned out to be correct...

What I am saying is that it is possible, in fact inevitable, that two legislators will look at a situation and the attendent evidence, and both in good faith come to different conclusions about the proper course of action. If every issue were crystal clear we wouldn't need a legislature...

The debate over the IWR was not so much about whether Iraq had WMD's...almost every proponent and opponent believed they did...it was about the amount of leeway to give Bush. Opponents were right in that...although the idea that Bush would have let a no vote stop him is laughable...but it is Bush that abused the authority given him, and he who is to blame for the debacle in Iraq.

[karynnj]

43. Did she speak out in early 2003 when that info

came out? Before the war?

[Greyhound]

64. Because it is about leadership, she does not lead. It is about coalition, she is divisive.

It is about principle, she has only one, furthering the corporate agenda. It is about sacrifice, she is interested only in gain and self-promotion.

Because I'm famous, or because I'm not (fill in the blank) are not a reason to vote for somebody. This pathetic attempt to compare her to Lincoln is insulting to Lincoln to the office, and to our intelligence.

[SaveElmer]

67. So much wrong in only 76 words...

You are quite talented!!!

[Nite Owl]

10. She is my Senator

and I don't have a clue. I am trying to understand why people want her to be President, I really am. I registered for the chat and never got the email to how to get on. I am open to being educated but what I hear is a lot of nothing so far. Someone had an article about some new health care plan for children but it was nothing new, just to renew a bill that is expiring and up the income level. Sure it's a good thing but nothing new. He voting record is good, not great but good. She voted for the IWR but many did. Where's the leadership? That's what I am looking for and not seeing in Hillary, not yet anyway. Being First Lady, being Bill's wife, being a woman, presenting a health care plan that wasn't good for the people, that doesn't do it. No candidate can be perfect but being able to lead, being for the people, that they have to have.

[Jim Sagle]

15. She's been strongly against violent video games.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

No, seriously.:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[evlbstrd]

20. Hey, you took mine!

That's my favorite one. She's been very vocal on that issue.

[Jim Sagle]

30. Well, when you've only got one issue, it's tough to share.

[evlbstrd]

36. True that.

I guess I'll go with flag burning.

[Tatiana]

48. Hmmm... I thought Tipper Gore did that! n/t

[Jim Sagle]

49. Tipper's cause was dangerous music.

[rwenos]

17. Well, She Admitted She Had No Idea

How the Rose Law Firm billing records got into the closet in the Residence.

Hey, if I didn't say it, someone else would.

[earthlover]

19. Her attitude towards political risks for principles can be summed up by...

..."I'm in it to win!" That says it all about what she is willing to risk for something she thinks is right. Sorta rings hollow, but that is a perfect phrase to depict what Hillary has become.

[terisan]

31. Are the other candidates in it to lose? n/t

[terisan]

34. Old Saying about Leadership

"A leader is someone who sees a parade and jumps in front of it".

I believe that the risk-takers who organize the parade may not get to lead the parade. There were many people who took risks to start the civil rights movement. They took the risks before MLK became its leader.

Who are the risk-takers among the potential candidates for president, which ones would make the best president ? I would prefer someone who put him or herself on the line, but I also want to be convinced he or she would be able to win and would be a competent and successful president.

On Clinton's original healthcare plan in 1993. She took a strong stand on the original planning.......and got severely trounced. (She was naive in 1993). Apparently the healthcare industry didn't believe they would get fat. They won, she lost. We lost. I personally paid a fortune for lousy insurance in the 1990s. My family suffered.

"May 28, 1993 - Bill Gradison, the head of the Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA), writes a letter to the First Lady restating his support for universal coverage but complaining of three recent occasions in which Hillary has attacked the health insurance industry for "price-gouging, cost-shifting and unconscionable profiteering." Gradison is actually playing a double game. He wants to diminish public support for a Clinton plan that can adversely affect the industry but he also is eager to appear accommodating so that he will be able to make adjustments in the reform bill he believes will ultimately pass".


read more here:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page1.html

[leftofthedial]

42. well, there was her non-vote on the Bankruptcy

predatory lender protection act . . .


Compared to Joe Biden and Harry Reid, that was a courageous, um, sort of not quite a stand . . .

[MannyGoldstein]

44. But She DID Vote For The First Predatory Lender Protection Act

in 2001 - didn't get as much press, but it was pretty awful.

[SaveElmer]

45. SHe gave a speech the day before laying out her opposition...she missed the vote...

Because Bill was having open-heart surgery

[leftofthedial]

47. to her credit, she says she would have voted "no."

but she voted for an almost equally stinky pro-corporate bill in 2001.

In her speech, her stated opposition was based on a few categories of dispute and repuke procedural thuggery, when it should have been a resounding "Hell no!" based on every syllable of that vile outrage.

[paulk]

59. that was the 2005 legislation, actually

she was one of about 80 or so other Senators who voted "yes" on the 2001 bankruptcy bill, although that vote is being held up as a major black mark on her record by the HHK (hillary hate krew)...

[karynnj]

61. You're right she did have a lot of company i including John Edwards

.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 1st Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate


Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 333, as amended )
Vote Number: 236 Vote Date: July 17, 2001, 04:06 PM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Bill Passed
Measure Number: H.R. 333
Measure Title: A bill to amend title 11, United States Code, and for other purposes.
Vote Counts: YEAs 82
NAYs 16
Present 1
Not Voting 1
< snip (list by alphabetical order:

Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---82
Akaka (D-HI)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Campbell (R-CO)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carnahan (D-MO)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Cleland (D-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Edwards (D-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (D-FL)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Miller (D-GA)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-NE)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---16
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Wellstone (D-MN)

Present - 1
Fitzgerald (R-IL)

Not Voting - 1
Smith (R-NH)

*** I highlighted all the Senators running, who voted for it. If it was bad for Clinton it was bad for them too - especially if they are running as an advocade of the poor.

[paulk]

68. OTOH, it looks like a plus for Sam Brownback!

That's the problem with Senate votes...

it's hard to say why someone may or may not have voted for any particular piece of legislation.

[karynnj]

74. I agree - your point though is well taken

if 82 people vote for something - there very likely was something for both side put in it.

I was shocked to see Brownback there - his name stands out as the "which one of these does not belong" on the list of no's. (I know he's a RW Christrian fundamentalist - maybe the Biblical injunction against usury?)

[Porcupine]

46. Kick- Still waiting for a real answer. Anybody?

For six years now I've been watching my country degrade. Our only hope for much of that time was for the Dems in the senate to hold the line and filibuster the worst of the bullshit.

For six years I've seen absolutely no freight carried by Hillary. There were people in the net an hour after 9-11 pointing out that having those towers come down was awfully freaking convienent. Nothing.

She voted FOR the Iraq War Resolution against the majority of the american populace and democrats both.

So what did she do to pull an equal amount of freight back to our side?

[blm]

54. Actually the majority was for war at the time. But when she knew Iraq was in

civil war last June, she voted against a BINDING Iraq withdrawal plan while remaining with most other Dems reluctant to admit publicly that Iraq was in civil war.

[Lord Byron]

50. Towing the corporate party line

Free trade. War.

[oasis]

52. "Bush Knew".Q: Who stood up in the senate chamber with a copy of the NY Post

(Bush Knew on cover)and called for a probe into the events surrounding 9/11?

A: Sen.Hillary Clinton.

Edit: to change publication title.

[Nedsdag]

55. Oh, I remember that!

But then again, she is pals with Post owner Rupert Murdoch.

Didn't she also take a "stand" against flag burning?

[oasis]

56. Do you remember if anyone in the House or Senate backed her up on it?

BTW, Time Magazine and Newsweek had similar titles on their publications during that period.

"Flag burning". The majority of Americans are against the burning our flag.That would include 100% of the U.S. Congress.

[harveyc]

62. Geez, I think you could have asked this same question ...

when John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton were seeking the party's nomination for the first time.

[Greyhound]

63. Even "her" health-care plan was nothing more than a gigantic windfall

for her corporate masters.

A corporatist is a corporatist is a corporatist, no matter which letter follows the name.

[wiley]

66. Senator Clinton's hold on a bad Ryan White Reauthorization Plan

put her at odds with many red state Senators and others who were going to cut off funding for HIV/AIDS prevention, outreach, treatment and support. This truly pissed off a great many people in states that one would assume she would need votes from. She held her ground and did what was right and courageous.

Thanks to her courageous stand - even under the threat from Senators like Thune and Enzi that they would add grotesque amendments like making it illegal for health care providers to discuss anything but abstinenece with patients at risk of sexually transmitted diseases - a compromise was reached that even Senator Kennedy (who had basically given up) could live with. Then, Senator Clinton lifted her hold.

All the while Republicans and political ruminators were saying that this would ruin her chances at being elected President. Whether it did or not I can not say, but she stood on principle.

[bmbmd]

69. Sometimes

it's hard to be a woman
and give your heart to just one man
but if you love him
you'll take care of him
for, after all, he's just a man.

She stood by her man.

[librechik]

70. stayin with Bill, and not baking cookies.

she seems to have caved on the flag burning thing tho. Jeez, what a disappointment she is. But what choice did she have? Damned if she did, damned if she didn't.

[MonkeyFunk]

72. she opposed

a flag burning amendment. She supported legislation instead, as a way to stave off a possible amendment.

[librechik]

73. thx for the correxn

still pretty weak--a non-issue that should have been ignored

[area51]

75. "Courageous"

HRC "courageously" sucked up to Tata Consulting, to help promote the offshoring/inshoring of American jobs in order to further impoverish Americans ... oh, wait, I meant traitorously.